Many researchers have complained that use of different local IRBs to review each research site for a multicenter trial is extremely inefficient and leads to additional cost burdens and trial delays. Despite this, many US research sites have been hesitant to use a single, central IRB. Is there a substantive difference, in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, between reviews conducted by decentralized (local) and centralized IRBs? What are the pros and cons of each? Are local IRBs really even necessary, or do they just create bottlenecks in modern clinical trials? The webinar will focus on these issues and look at study startup metrics associated with IRBs.
What if electronic Clinical Outcome Assessments (eCOA) offered advanced functionalities AND it was a less expensive option than paper COA?
During this webinar, we will examine multiple strategies that make the procedure of finding a better electronic data capture solution less frustrating and more beneficial to your organization.
Does social media have a place in clinical research? The answer is increasingly "yes!" – but with caveats. Watch now to learn more.
Developing informed consent content requires a lot of back and forth communication between multiple stakeholders - an inefficient, slow process with a history of allowing unapproved or out-of-date consents to be accidentally deployed to sites. Electronic Informed Consent (eConsent) offers a streamlined, collaborative process that promotes faster content development, approval and deployment on one platform, guaranteeing that only the most current and approved consent version is used each time.
Securing informed consent from clinical trial participants involves more than a signature—you need to ensure participants truly understand what they’re signing. Learn from industry expert, Sandra “SAM” Sather, on how the electronic informed consent (eConsent) process improves the way participants are consented on a clinical trial.
You may already know too well the challenges of a paper-based Informed Consent process, but did you know that Informed Consent is one of the most cited deficiencies by regulatory authorities? Paper-based informed consent increases your risk for delayed approvals, fines, litigation and even trial failure.
You may already know too well the challenges of a paper-based Informed Consent process, but did you know that Informed Consent is one of the most cited deficiencies by regulatory authorities? Paper-based informed consent increases your risk for delayed approvals, fines, litigation and even trial failure.
The informed consent process intends to ensure trial participants understand the risks and benefits of joining your trial, but a poor experience leads to low recruitment rates and costly drop-outs. Electronic Informed Consent (eConsent) improves recruitment and retention of participants by developing better comprehension of consent materials and improving engagement for the full duration of your study. In this short video, industry expert Sandra "Sam" Sather, reviews the ways that eConsent supports and adds value to the recruitment process.
Clinical trials using electronic Clinical Outcome Assessments (eCOA) benefit from compliance rates 300% higher than paper-based studies - yet some sponsors hesitate to adopt eCOA due to a misconception that paper diaries cost less. We compare the often hidden costs of paper data collection vs. eCOA to help you decide which is best for your next trial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|